首页> 外文期刊>Built environment >How Policy Institutions Filter Conflict The (De)Escalation of Policy Conflict through Closing Down or Opening Up the Space for Contestation
【24h】

How Policy Institutions Filter Conflict The (De)Escalation of Policy Conflict through Closing Down or Opening Up the Space for Contestation

机译:政策机构如何过滤冲突(de)政策冲突的升级通过关闭或开放争议空间

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

This article argues that in situations of policy conflict, policymaking institutions that act as de facto conflict arbiters may escalate the conflict they are trying to settle. The role of institutions in policy conflicts is studied in the lengthy and highly contested policymaking process of the multibillion-euro 'Oostenveelconnection' highway in Antwerp (Belgium). The article concludes that while narrowing the scope of conflict through standardized institutional procedures initially disciplined the Oosterweel conflict, it ultimately drove further escalation, as residual topics of conflict remained and sought new institutional outlets. At the same time, more flexible institutions, while being able to finally settle the Oosterweel conflict, produced an agreement that remained institutionally unembedded and therefore more vulnerable to exploitation because it was not formally enforceable.
机译:本文认为,在政策冲突的情况下,作为事实上冲突仲裁人的政策制定机构可能会升级他们试图解决的冲突。 在安特卫普(比利时)的Multibilion-Euro'OostenveelConnection'高速公路的漫长和高度争议的政策制定过程中,研究了机构在政策冲突中的作用。 本文得出结论,同时通过标准化的机构程序缩小冲突范围,初步纪律讨论了OosterWeel冲突,它最终推动了进一步的升级,因为冲突的剩余主题仍然留下并寻求新的机构网点。 与此同时,更灵活的机构,同时能够终于解决OosterWeel冲突,产生了一项协议,该协议仍然是肆无忌惮的,因此更容易剥削,因为它没有正式可执行。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号